tv Fareed Zakaria GPS CNN August 5, 2012 10:00am-11:00am EDT
at three times the rate that the west did. what changed was not china's culture which presumably was the same in the 1970s as it was in the 1980s. what changed starting in 1979 were china's economic policies. the same is true for japan and india. had romney spent more time reading milton freedman, he would have realized that historically the key driver for economic growth has been the adoption of capitalism and its related institutions and policies across diverse cultures. the link between economic policy and performance can be seen even in the country on which romney was lavishing praise. israel had many admirable traits in its early decades, but no one would have called it an economic miracle. its economy was highly statist, even socialist. things changed in the 1990s with market-oriented reforms, initiated by netanyahu and also sound monetary policies. the result of these policies was
israel's economy grew much faster in the 1990s than it had in the 1980s. the miracle romney was praising had to do with new policies rather than deep culture. despite all this evidence, most people still believe that two cultures in particular, islamic and african, inhibit economic development. but the two countries that will next achieve a gross domestic product of $1 trillion happen to both be muslim democracies. turkey and indonesia. and of the ten fastest growing economies in the world right now, seven are in africa. the world is changing, and holding on it fixed views of culture means you miss its changing dynamics. while culture is important, it's the shared historical experience of people that is reflected in institutions and practices, but culture changes. german culture by 1955 was very different from what it was in 1935. europe was once a hotbed of
violence, nationalism, and war. to date it is post national, almost pacifist. the united states was once an isolationist, eegraran republic. daniel patrick moynihan once observed "the central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics that determines the success of a society. the central liberal truth is that politics can change culture and save it from itself." that remains the wisest statement made about this complicated problem, probably too wise to ever be uttered in an american political campaign. let's get started. so let's delve more deeply into governor romney's remarks, his trip, middle eastern peace, iran's nuclear ambitions, the
american jewish vote. no, we don't have three hours, but we are going to have a stimulating conversation with our guests. peter beinart, editor of "the daily beast" open zion blog and author of "the crisis of zionism." and bret stevens, columnist for affairs in the "wall street journal." tell me about what -- i guess you'll agree with the column of don freedman from a couple of days ago when he says "much of what is wrong with the u.s./israeli relationship can be found in this romney tripe. in recent years they've decided to make israel a wedge issue to garner more jewish and evangelical votes and money, the gop has decided to out pro-israel, the democrats, by being even more unquestioning of israel." he end by seeing, "stop using this as a photo op for fundraisers. stop making things worse by
telling israelis things they want to hear to grovel for jewish votes and money by blatantly avoiding the other side." i take it you agree? >> yeah, i don't think the romney trip was mostly about american jewish votes. a small percentage of american j jews making it a voting issue. of 4%, most probably already support romney. i think it was really as thom ad friedman mentioned, it was donor maintenance. it was basically romney has a small number of very rich american jewish donors who are very far to the right. sheldon adele son was in the front row. and sheldon adelson is someone who opposes a palestinian state, believes the palestinians are an invented people, and has said that all terrorists are islamic. and what romney did was he went and catered to sheldon adelson, never mentioned the world palestinian state, never mentioned the word palestinian, and said america should never publicly criticize israeli
policy which would put him at odds with even old past republican presidents since israel begin building the settlement. i thought on the foreign policy terms, it was simply absurd. >> bret, you said that this trip actually made you warm to mitt romney for the first time. >> yeah, for one thing there seemed to be an aspect of sincerity and conviction in what the governor was saying, which you don't always hear from him on many other issues. i think he really believed what he was saying. perhaps we ought to give him the benefit of the doubt. going to what peter just said, i'm not sure that what was in play here was the jewish vote in the united states, although that might have been part of the political calculation. i think israel has become an -- a hugely important issue to tens of millions of american christians. that's an aspect which romney can distinguish himself in temss of his foreign policy
credentials from the president. >> you say we live in a time when living in israel is a key test of presidential fitness and rightly so. why is that rightly so? >> well, you look at the people, the american sorted of political universe who are openly anti-israel from david duke on the right to fringe voices on the left. sometimes infecting some of our intelligence bureaucracies or diplomatic bureaucracies. you sense that to understand that there's a -- there's a key not only strategic relationship between the two countries but a values-based relationship expresses something of, you know, part of an american consensus. i think it would be equally sort of strange to have an american presidential candidate come out and say i am for getting out of nato, or i don't think that we should have any foreign military presence in korea. i think it's one of those vaults or point of view that kind of establishes that you are in the
zone of acceptable presidential candidates. and that was true, by the way, not only for romney or george w. bush, it was true for barack obama, it was true for bill clinton. this is emerging as part of the sort of consensus view of american foreign policy. and i think in general it's a very healthy view. >> peter? >> well, i think the real question is not whether we support israel's right to exist. i agree on that question, bret is right. there is a pretty wide consensus. the question is whether we want israel to remain a democracy. an israel that makes perm its occupation over millions of palestinians who don't have citizenship, don't have the right to vote, live under military law, is a profound violation of the democratic commitments in israel's own declaration of independence. and if you're not committed to the idea of a palestinian state, i'm not saying that getting there is easy, but i'm not -- unless you're committed to the idea of a democrat ike -- of a palestinian state, you are essentially in favor of israel
sacrificing its democratic character. i think the struggle in the republican party -- bret mentioned evangelical christians. what he didn't mention is that many of their evangelical christian leaders are explicitly in favor of israel controlling permanently the west bank and, therefore, essentially becoming in many senses a non-democratic jewish state. the question for mitt romney is, does he support that view which is also sheldon adelson's view, or does he support the view that in fact for america's own security interests and given the spirit of israel's own declaration of independence, we should actually be opposed to israeli settlement growth and in favor of the two-state solution. he basically ducked that question when he was forced to confront his biggest -- sheldon adelson in the front row of that speech, which i thought was an act of political cowardice. >> there's so much caricature in what peter said. here i'm supposedly on the right side of this debate. i would happily say i'm all for a two-state solution. i look forward to a palestinian state -- >> i was talking about romney, not you. >> hold on. i think i speak for a lot of
people who are on the side of the issue. i don't think mitt romney has offered a view one way or the other. but the important point is not whetheyou're for a democratic israel or you're for a palestinian state. the important question is how that palestinian state is going to come into being. whether it's going to come into being in a negotiated and peaceful way, and what the character of that state is going to be in the future. is that state going to be a progressive, forward looking, liberal-minded state that wants to live in peace with israel, or is it going to be another miniature of lebanon or iran or another state that remains irredeemably intent on destroying what remines of israel. that's the issue. like needing an operation. just because you need an operation, i think both peter and i can agree that at some point, israel might need an operation, doesn't mean that you just take out the hacksaw and cut off your leg because otherwise you're faced with the possibility of the cancer spreading. >> peter? >> sure, but if you know you're
going to need the operation sooner or later, continuing to do the behavior which is making you sicker and sicker and sicker with massive settlement subsidies -- there was just a report in israeli press last week that the city -- seven cities which get the most government subsidies are all in the west bank. making yourself sicker and -- i agree with bret. the operation is not going to be easy. there are serious risks to the creation of a palestinian state. but further entrenching israel in the west bank only will make that ultimate struggle much, much more difficult and push palestinians into the arms of hamas and hezbollah and those who want a one-state solution. >> all right. as you can see, we could go on for another three hours on this. we're going to come back, and we're going to talk about iran. we're also going to talk about obama and his foreign policy. [ male announcer ] citi turns 200 this year.
in that time there've been some good days. and some difficult ones. but, through it all, we've persevered, supporting some of the biggest ideas in modern history. so why should our anniversary matter to you? because for 200 years, we've been helping ideas move from ambition to achievement. and the next great idea could be yours. ♪ i'll give you money for gas. [ laughing ] not necessary. take the money. i'm not taking your money. besides i get great gas mileage. what's that? it's eassist. helps the engine run really efficiently. it captures energy that assists the engine... so i'm never guzzling gas. oh -- that's hippie talk. it's called technology dad... here take two dollars. take the money. [ male announcer ] the all new 37 mpg highway chevy malibu eco. from conserving fuel, to the technology that makes it happen. chevy runs deep.
out for drinks, eats. i have very well fitting dentures. i like to eat a lot of fruits. love them all. the seal i get with the super poligrip free keeps the seeds from getting up underneath. even well-fitting dentures let in food particles. super poligrip is zinc free. with just a few dabs, it's clinically proven to seal out more food particles so you're more comfortable and confident while you eat. a lot of things going on in my life and the last thing i want to be thinking about is my dentures. [ charlie ] try zinc free super poligrip.
is my dentures. last season was the gulf's best tourism season in years. in florida we had more suntans... in alabama we had more beautiful blooms... in mississippi we had more good times... in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spot on the gulf... and come on down. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. but they haven't experienced extra strength bayer advanced aspirin. in fact, in a recent survey, 95% of people who tried it agreed that it relieved their headache fast. visit fastreliefchallenge.com today for a special trial offer.
palestine, iran. on iran, bret, i wanted to ask you -- ehud barak, defense minister of israel, former prime minister, said to cnn that he thought president obama had done in terms of actual military assistance and intelligence assistance more for israel than any previous administration. in that context, do you think it's fair for romney, republicans to suggest that president obama is soft on the iran issue? >> look, what is ehud barak supposed to say? that the president has not met the test of what he requires -- those comments are a little bit -- should be treated as purely political comments. look, the worrying thing is that -- about the obama administration's attitude toward iran is that it has gone through a succession of measures. the attempt at diplomatic engagement, attempt at covert
activity, racheting up slowly sanction, and the effect from the point of view of iran's nuclear programs has been relatively -- relatively negligible. >> peter beinart, you think that the obama administration could do more? >> well, in terms of sarnnction the obama administration has been more effective than the bush administration than putting in tough sanction autos -- even iranians acknowledged that the sanctions are hurting the iranian economy a great deal. we don't know -- i want to be clear. i'm not saying that the sanctions will ultimately lead the iranians to make the kind of deal that we would need to get. we simply don't know. the toughest sanctions haven't been in effect that long. given the fact that virtually the entire israeli security, permanent security establishment thinks that military action would be disastrous, i think it's worse giving them and diplomacy a little tight to try to see whether we have an alternative. >> hang on.
what the israeli military establishment, at least some leading ex-figures of it, have said is that israeli military action would be disastrous. i appreciate that view in that i don't think it ought to rest on israel's shoulders, the task of taking care of a problem that is ultimately not only an american problem but a global problem. i am heartened by panetta talki in a substantive way about a u.s. military option against iran. ultimately, iran's -- iran is a country that would have blown up a restaurant in washington, d.c., without the benefit of a nuclear umbrella. america should worry about what it's capable of doing with the benefit of that umbrella. >> yes. i think america should worry about the prospects of a nuclear iran. absolutely. but we should also worry about the prospect of what war with iran -- this would be war with iran -- would mean for our
ongoing war in afghanistan, for our troops who would be at risk in the gulf, to our citizen through the possibility of terrorism, to the international economy. we are a country that has had ten years now of very painful experiences with wrs that we were told were going to go easily. if we were going into a third middle eastern war -- that's what it would be. since we have no idea what the consequences would be and in fact our own military leaders have said that the consequences could be a regional war that could be quite terrifying, i think we have to have an open and honest conversation about the american people about whether they want to go through with that. >> peter, i want to switch gears for a second and talk about something that is at the heart of your book and is, of course, going to be something people care about with this impending election in the united states. do you think that president obama will get the same percentage of the jewish vote that he got the last time around? >> it key thing to understand
about the american jewish vote is american jews don't primarily vote on israel. they vote on domestic issues. they're tied to the democratic party. why? because they're secular. this is the key thing to understand. american lipsticks largely a division between the religious and secular, within every religious group. the religious are more republican. the secular more democratic. because jews are much more secular than american christians, the divide which cuts through christian denominations roughly 50/50 cuts through american jews, roughly 75/25. the israel issue is not going to make a big difference. barack obama may get a little bit lower, but i think it's very unlikely that he will get list than 70%. >> bret, would you agree with both the prediction but also the analysis behind it, that it is really about secular versus religion, religious issues for jews, not the issue of support for israel? >> i think that's largely right. then again, this is an election
that is going to be determined on the margins. on the margins, i do think there is some percentage of secular-minded of -- of secular-minded jews who have been turned off by the president's foreign policy. they've probably been turned off by the failure of the economy and various other hopes and change that were never quite met. i think that romney does have a fighting chance to peel off some percentage of the american jewish vote that previously went for barack obama. that could prove decisive in a state like florida or other places where jews could provide the margin between electoral victory or defeat. >> bret stevens, peter beinart, thank you very much. up next, 23 years after tiananmen, most of the protesters' demands still have not been met. is china actually beginning to give in to people power? we'll explain when we get back. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 let's talk about that 401(k) you picked up back in the '80s.
tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like a lot of things, the market has changed, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and your plans probably have too. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, we'll give you personalized recommendations tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 on how to reinvest that old 401(k). tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and bring your old 401(k) into the 21st century. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 rollover your 401(k) or ira and receive up to $600. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 see schwab.com for terms and conditions.
this past week an unusual state of affairs caught my eye. i expect protests in china to be stamped out pretty quickly. instead, not only did the government recently allow a large group of protesters to run amok, it also apologized and caved in to their demands. what in the world? let's begin in the town of qidong, about an hour north of shanghai. thousands assembled to protest the construction of an industrial waste pipeline. then something rarely seen in china took place -- despite the presence of scores of policemen, the protesters went wild. hundreds entered and took over an entire government building. computers were smashed. outside, cars were overturned. at least two police officers were beaten up. i would have expected beijing to retaliate with great force. instead, it caved. the waste disposal project was abandoned. ♪ >> and the state-run people's
daily applauded the decision flea market writing that a responsible government should "create an inclusive environment for public opinion." the same thing happened earlier. tens of thousands staged a protest against a smelting plant. it was met with anti-riot police and teargas. but later the government relented, doing a u-turn and shutting down the $1.6 billion project. the two protests, despite being about 2,000 miles apart, are actually connected. residents of qidong said they were inspired by the news of the successful demonstration. the protesters in both cities mobilized on webo, children's version of twitter, where as many as 300 million users share news, photos, and discuss politics. according to the consulting firm mckinsey, china has by far the world's most active social media
population. 91% of its surveyed internet users visited a social media web site in the last six months compared with 70% in south korea, 67% in the united states, and 30% in japan. the internet, despite beijing's best efforts at censorship, has empowered and connected china's people in a way that could not have been envisioned even a few years ago. so are the events of qidong and shifong to continue, tell spread? for one thing, beijing picks its battles. if people complain about pollution or the environment, it increasingly has begun to make concessions. protests over economic policy produce less change. and demands for political liberalization are met with a very different kind of response. also, men many of these decisions are taking place at the local and provincial level
where governments have significant powers and independent. sometimes the provinces will tolerate demonstrations as a pressure valve to let off steam. [ applause ] >> in other cases, most cases they crack down. the key is whether protests in one place build momentum to a regional or national level, and that's what beijing works very hard to prevent. about four in ten chinese now have access to the internet. as cheap advances, that ratio will grow and grow. in the past, beijing could contain the flow of information from one part of the country to another. but that might prove increasingly difficult as the chinese people get more and more connected. the internet will not make china free. that will take actual chinese reformers and revolutionaries and organized movements. but technology does in some ways help the cause of individual liberty here. up next, that rarest of turnarounds. a global warming skeptic who is now a believer. don't miss it.
donuts. -my taste buds. -[ taste buds ] waffles. how about we try this new kind of fiber one cereal? you think you're going to slip some fiber by us? rookie. okay. ♪ nutty clusters and almonds, ♪ ♪ almonds. ♪ fiber one is gonna make you smile. ♪ [ male announcer ] introducing new fiber one nutty clusters and almonds. with 43% daily value of fiber for you. crunchy nutty clusters and real almond slices for your taste buds. and real almond slices hey america, even though slisa rinna is wearing the new depend silhouette briefs for charity to prove how great the fit is even under a fantastic dress. the best protection now looks, fits and feels just like underwear. we invite you to get a free sample and try one on too. throughout our lives. one a day women's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for women's health concerns as we age. it has more of 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day 50+.
to support cell health. those little things for you, life's about her. but your erectile dysfunction - that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medications, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sexual activity. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as this may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess with cialis.
side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long-term injury, seek immediate medical help for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or if you have any allergic reactions such as rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing, stop taking cialis and get medical help right away. ask your doctor about cialis for daily use and a 30-tablet free trial. what ? customers didn't like it. so why do banks do it ? hello ? hello ?! if your bank doesn't let you talk to a real person 24/7, you need an ally. hello ? ally bank. no nonsense. just people sense. who dreamed she could fly.
like others who braved the sky before her, it took a mighty machine, and plain old ingenuity to go where no fifth grader had gone before. ♪ and she flew and she flew, into the sky and beyond. my name is annie and i'm the girl who dreamed she could fly. powered by intel core processors. ♪ with odor free aspercreme. powerful medicine relieves pain fast, with no odor. so all you notice is relief. aspercreme. i'm candy crowley in washington. "fareed zakaria gps" returns in a moment. first, a check of the top stories. there are reports that jared loughner will plead guilty to the january, 2011, tucson,
arizona, shooting that killed six people and wounded 13 others, including former congresswoman gabby giffords. the "los angeles times" time and the "wall street journal" report that loughner has been judged mentally competent to understand the charges against him and will enter a plea tuesday. the u.s. attorney's office is not confirming or denying those reports. more than a dozen wildfires are burning in oklahoma. the drought, strong winds, and extreme heat have made conditions in the state critical. so far, more than 120 homes and buildings have been destroyed. a prominent nasa scientist is linking the extreme weather to climate change. james hanson says it's no longer enough to say that no individual weather event can be linked to global warming. in a "washington post" opinion piece today, hanson says, "for the extreme hot weather of the recent past, there is virtually no explanation other than climate change." those are your top stories. "reliable sources" is at the top of the hour. now back to "fareed zakaria
gps." there is broad scientific agreement that global warming is happening and that we humans are at least partially to blame. but there are some very important scientific skeptics. last week in the opinion pages of "the new york times," one of the most important of those skeptics did a public aboutface. richard muller is a physicist at the university of california at berkeley who recently doubted the existence of global warming. now he says it's real, and humans are almost entirely to blame. how he came to this change of heart or mind and why is fascinating. welcome, professor muller. >> thank you. >> you -- you say in that piece that all scientists should be skeptics. and i think you're right. i remember nils boor once said that every question should be a visual hypothesis that has to be tested. what made you start doubting
your original skepticism? what made you look at -- what evidence convinced you that something real was happening here? >> the issues were so large that about 2 1/2 years ago, my daughter and i began a major scientific research effort in which we recruited a dozen of some of the top scientists in the world, including sa sal permeter, who won the nobel prize last year well after he joined our team. we felt there were questions that were valid. questions about data reliability, about data adjustment. about the choice of the stations which had been used. these demanded attention, and i couldn't get the answers. only way to do is t was to do the study ourselves. so after a great deal of work, largely done by robert rody, who i can't compliment enough. his superb work in data analysis which we all carefully participated in. about a year ago, maybe nine months, we came -- i came to the conclusion that, yes, global warming was real. then over the last three to six
months, rody was able to extend the record back to 1753. we now had a really long record beginning before the american revolution when benjamin franklin and thomas jefferson were the ones taking the data. with this long record, we could look for the signatures of the various possible causes. we're able to rule out solar variability, able to rule out volcanos. they had an effect, but it was short-lived. when we tried fitting it to see whether it looked like carbon dioxide, it was right on. it was a shock to me that how well that carbon dioxide curve fit our new temperature data set. >> so when you look at the historical data now, is it fair to characterize the situation thus, that ever since the industrial revolution human beings have been pumping more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and that that increase in co2 has been having the effect that we call global
warming? >> that is my viewpoints on this. you can't prove it. it's always possible that something random is happening that just happens to match the carbon dioxide data. but it leads me to conclude that essentially all of this warming over the last 250, 260 years has been caused by greenhouse gases emitted by humans. >> now, do you also worry about the potential effects that this will is on life -- a lot of people talk about global warming and say if it gets to a certain point, the higher end of the u.n. estimates, you could have very significant coastal flooding. and you could have kind of unintended consequences, sort of follow-on effects that could be even more damaging to life on earth. >> well, i am deeply worry good it. the coastal flooding, the u.n. estimate is something like between two and three feet.
that's not huge. but i am concerned. i think rising temperatures soon will be in a realm that's higher than we homosapiens have ever experienced. i do not personally believe that's good for our civilization. i think we really do need to do something about it. >> and what do you think, you know, when you look at the issue of what to do about it, there are people who say, look, the only thing we can do is -- what's called adaptation. we should rotate crops, we should build dikes, we should do those kind of things, and then there are people who say, no, the problems was so serious, you have to get at the root cause and slow down the emission of co2. >> i believe in the latter. and you -- adaptation, we're very adaptable species. adaptation is always disruptive, and it hurts. let's see what we can do. and the biggest thing we have to do -- we have to recognize that the reason the carbon dioxide is shooting up is not because of the u.s. ours has been going down the last few years as we switch from
coal to natural gas. natural gas emitts only 1/3 of the carbon dioxide that does coal. if we are going to do something, there are two things we have to do. one is energy conservation efficiency, that's really important. a huge amount we can do there. number two is we've got to switch the world, china, india, and particularly the developing world away from coal and on to natural gas. that's a solution that a lot of my environmentalist friends don't like because they have decided they have to oppose hydraulic fracturing known as fracking. but in fact that is one of the two biggest things we can do. energy conservation and the switch to natural gas from coal. >> your funding -- some of your funding came from the coke brothers who are famously anti-global warming or believe that it isn't happening. how did that play out? were they disappointed by the results of your research? have they asked for their money
back? >> i'm actually -- i find it amusing how many people think they know what the coke brothers are thinking. it's a caricature of these people who -- i did speak with them. and they made it clear to me from the very beginning that they recognized that there were serious issues raised about prior estimates to global warming. everything from urban heat islands to data selection bias to other things. and they knew that i wanted to look into that. that our team would do a good, unbiased job, and all they were asking for was scientific objectivity. so i was very pleased with their fundings. i really sensed they wanted to have this problem solved. and they never gave me any suggestion, any hint of a suggestion about which side they were hoping we would come out on. >> and you haven't heard from them since you've gone public on these issues? >> oh, i actually have talked to them, and they appear to be very pleased. >> professor muller, pleasure to
have you on. thank you very much. if you want to learn more about dr. muller's ideas, he has a new book out, "energy for future presidents," from norton. we'll be back with a conversation you won't want to miss. there's a reason your mother told you never to talk about politics in mixed company. i'll explain. it's something you're born with. and inspires the things you choose to do. you do what you do... because it matters. at hp we don't just believe in the power of technology. we believe in the power of people when technology works for you. to dream. to create. to work. if you're going to do something. make it matter. ♪ i want to go ♪ i want to win [ breathes deeply ] ♪ this is where the dream begins ♪
♪ i want to grow ♪ i want to try ♪ i can almost touch the sky [ male announcer ] even the planet has an olympic dream. dow is proud to support that dream by helping provide greener, more sustainable solutions from the olympic village to the stadium. solutionism. the new optimism.™ ♪ this dream i have a great fit with my dentures. i love kiwis. i've always had that issue with the seeds getting under my denture. super poligrip free --
it creates a seal of the dentures in my mouth. even well-fitting dentures let in food particles. super poligrip is zinc free. with just a few dabs, it's clinically proven to seal out more food particles so you're more comfortable and confident while you eat. super poligrip free made the kiwi an enjoyable experience. [ charlie ] try zinc free super poligrip. made the kiwi an enjoyable experience. one is for a clean, wedomestic energy future that puts us in control. our abundant natural gas is already saving us money, producing cleaner electricity, putting us to work here in america and supporting wind and solar. though all energy development comes with some risk, we're committed to safely and responsibly producing natural gas. it's not a dream. america's natural gas... putting us in control of our energy future, now.
my next guest set out to explore this from a scientific perspective. jonathan haidt is the author of "the righteous mind: why good people are divided by politics and religion." he is also a professor at the nyu stern school of business. he joins me now. welcome. >> thank you, fareed. >> so the first thing i'm struck by in your work is you don't think that people adopt political positions entirely because of reason, because of rational reasons. they -- why do we end up being liberal or conservative? >> i'm a social psychologist. and the view from social psychology is that our principal goal isn't to get as much stuff for ourselves as possible. our obsession is that people around us like us, respect us, trust us, take us into their team. and so our political beliefs turn out to be largely badges and bumper stickers and things wye do and say to impress certain constituencies, the people that we want to impress.
they're not really based on any careful calculation of what's best for the world or what's best for me even. we become quite tribal, and we adopt the signs of our tribe. >> so we want to be sort of emotionally almost in sync with the people whom we hang out with, respect, admire? >> that's a perfect way to say it. it's based largely on feeling. >> why is it that liberals don't get conservatives but conservatives understand liberals? >> there are a couple of reasons. one, as you and i know, if you grow up through ivy league-type schools, you're exposed to liberal ideas constantly. i never really read anything by a conservative until i was in my late 30s. you have to actually seek it out. the other, more psychological reason, is that if conservatives build on these five foundations including loyalty and sanctity and liberals reject those, there aren't really moral foundations or psychological systems that liberals have that conservatives lack, can't understand. but liberal vs. a lot of trouble
understanding like -- what's going on with gay marriage, what could possibly be wrong with gay marriage? i just don't get. it you don't hear conservatives saying what could possibly be wrong with racial discrimination, i just don't get it. again -- >> they do seem to be utterly incomprehending of a desire for more government regulation or some -- don't conservatives -- >> it's not that they can't understand the agree, they don't desire it. it's different from i can't grasp what the issue is here. >> do you think that that gives conservatives some kind of advantage? >> in tomorrows of election its definitely does. -- in terms of elections it definitely does. many have argued, george laycov, george west, agree that democrats appeal to make statements that are more cerebral, argument. we saw that with obama saying, if you have a business, you didn't start that yourself. you trot out a story about how
lots of people contributed to it. that's an argument that doesn't connect closely with the moral foundations i'm talking about. i read a lot of right wing stuff. they're having a field day with it because their argument about fairness and independence and hard work, those resonate viscerally. the democrats' argument is more cerebral. yeah, you can follow the logic of it. >> do you think that going forward, you know, whirlwind moving -- the da democrats have an advantage, do the republicans have an advantage? how do you see the landscape? >> one thing i learned from talking with political scientists is, whatever my common sense views from elections from what i read in the newspaper are wrong. issues like the jobless rates are important factors. as a scientist i'm trying to contribute other factors that matter. and i do think that in the older culture war about gay marriage and abortion, that stuff, i
think the republicans did have an advantage. in the newer one about capitalism and fairness, i think -- i don't see a clear advantage on either side. mitt romney could make a very inspiring case for capitalism. i think one can be an aid. i think he's making a bad case for it. and obama's making a -- kind of a poor guys -- not exactly against it. i don't see clear advantage to either side on these financial issues. >> and -- you yourself are a liberal. >> well, i'm a liberal by temperament. and if you looked at my genes and friends and all of that, yes. but in terms of policies and philosophy, i'm a centrist. in doing research for the book, i came to see that, you know what, both sides are right about the things they care most about. and they're right about the big issues they fought for in history. and if you just are a member of one team and you say, look, our side is right about, you know, gender equality, or our side was right about communism, you see the things that your side was right about, and you're just blind. you don't see that there's all
these other threats and problems and solutions that the other side is talking about. that's where we are. the two sides saying, we're right, no, we're right. bang. >> jonathan haidt, pleasure to have you on. >> thank you, fareed. we will be back. the us bank wealth management advisor can help you. every step of the way. from big steps, to little steps. since 1863 we've helped guide our clients, so they can take the steps to help grow, preserve, and pass along their wealth. so their footsteps can help the next generation find their own path. all of us serving you. us bank
tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 like a lot of things, the market has changed, tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and your plans probably have too. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 at charles schwab, we'll give you personalized recommendations tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 on how to reinvest that old 401(k). tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 so talk to chuck tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 and bring your old 401(k) into the 21st century. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 rollover your 401(k) or ira and receive up to $600. tdd#: 1-800-345-2550 see schwab.com for terms and conditions. last season was the gulf's best tourism season in years. in florida we had more suntans... in alabama we had more beautiful blooms... in mississippi we had more good times... in louisiana we had more fun on the water. last season we broke all kinds of records on the gulf. this year we are out to do even better... and now is a great time to start. our beatches are even more relaxing... the fishing's great. so pick your favorite spot on the gulf...
and come on down. brought to you by bp and all of us who call the gulf home. in here, every powerful collaboration is backed by an equally powerful and secure cloud. that cloud is in the network, so it can deliver all the power of the network itself. bringing people together to develop the best ideas -- and providing the apps and computing power to make new ideas real. it's the cloud from at&t. with new ways to work together, business works better. ♪ ♪ [ chirping ] [ chirping ] ♪ [ chirping ] ♪ [ male announcer ] audi a4 drivers have spoken. [ engine revs ] and they ranked the a4 highest in total quality index in its class. [ chirps ] experience the summer of audi event
a blackout in india this week left some 600 million people without electricity. after calling my mom to make sure she was okay, it got me wondering -- what percent of the people in the world don't have electricity. that's our question of the week. is it a, 6%? b, 16%? c, 26%? d, 36%? stay tuned, we'll tell you the correct answer. if you like the "gps challenge," go to cnn.com/fareed for more. you can follow us on twitter and on facebook. also remember if you miss a show
or a special, you can get them on itunes. the audio podcast is free. you can buy the video version. go to itunes.com/fareed. thnchlt week's back of the week is "the book of joe." a well-written comic novel with a twist. people sometimes tell me the books i recommend aren't exactly beach reading. well, this one is:now for "the last look." if you were this guy in the pink shirt, you might think that this was your last look at life. he's on a tourist bus in egypt, and -- [ screams ] >> who's that knocking? terrorists. in short order, they blindfold him, and pulled him off the bus. only to reveal -- surprise -- it's a reality show for egyptian tv. [ bleep ] >> this was just a prank, and his fellow tourists on the bus were in on it. really funny, huh? not so much. especially when americans and others are kidnapped with some regulator there these days.
pair that with this ad created by the egyptian military that ran earlier this summer on state tv. [ speaking native language ] >> it warns egyptians to beware of foreigners. they might be spies. this english-speaking guy is the heavy here. now egypt gets more than 10% of its gdp from tourism. tourism revenues are down almost a quarter since before the revolution. and this is the welcome mat being laid down by the egyptians. the correct answer to our "gps challenge" question was c, 26% of the world's population does not have regular access to electricity, according to the world bank. most of those people are in sub-saharan africa and the poorer, more rural parts of asia. thanks to all of you for being part of my program this week. i will see you next week. stay tuned for "reliable sources."
when an aide to mitt romney tells reporters to kiss his backside, you know there are serious strains between the candidates and the press. when fox's greta van us isternsays romney's press corps is being treated like a petting zoo you know there's a dysfunctional relationship. now romney and his allies are suggesting that the media ruined his international trip with a focus on gaffes. >> now the reporters are harassing romney, trying to create gaffes. >> can that be true, or are conservatives just blaming the messenger? nbc gets trashed for its coverage of the olympic. especially after complaints to twitter led to retaliation against the british newspaper critic. what were these companies thinking? a freelance reporter exposes new yorker writer joan elyra as a serial fabricator who made up quotes from bob dylan. and lara stonewalled him the whole time. >> he lied to me in that conversation, actually. he lied to me in his confession. >> we'll talk to michael moynihan about how he feels
about costing lehrer his job. talk about lying, the former editor of "the new york times" is the victim of a hoax perpetrated by wikileaks. bill keller on that bizarre episode, media bias, and feelings about fox news. i'm howard kurtz, and this is "reliable sources." now if you had to pick a moment, a snapshot, a glimpse of the tensions between romney and the press corps, it would have to be this. at the tail end of a foreign trip consumed by negative headlines, the republican candidate was walking toward his car after a wreath-laying ceremony within earshot of reporters. >> governor romney? >> can you comment on the mishaps during your trip? >> governor romney, do you have a statement for the palestinians? >> what about your gaffe? >> governor romney, do you feel that your gaffes have overshadowed your foreign trip? >> this is a holy site for the